Bhagwan Ratnaji Kalbande vs State of Maharashtra Through Collector Washim Advocate - VYAWAHARE ABHIJIT RAGHUNATH — 12/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O43, Rule 1(r),151. Disposed: Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED on 10th April 2026.
M.C.A. - Misc.Civil Appeal
CNR: MHWS010002232024
e-Filing Number
01-03-2024
Filing Number
138/2024
Filing Date
01-03-2024
Registration No
12/2024
Registration Date
02-03-2024
Court
District and Sessions Court, Washim
Judge
1-Principal District and Sessions Judge, Washim
Decision Date
10th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Bhagwan Ratnaji Kalbande
Adv. PATHAN AMJADKHAN AZADKHAN
Godawari Bhagwan Kalbande
Adv. PATHAN AMJADKHAN AZADKHAN
Respondent(s)
State of Maharashtra Through Collector Washim Advocate - VYAWAHARE ABHIJIT RAGHUNATH
The Tahsildar Washim
Taluka Inspector Land Record
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge, Washim
Disposed
Judgment
Judgment
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 09-04-2026 | Judgment |
| 07-04-2026 | Judgment |
| 25-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 16-03-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Bhagwan Ratnaji Kalbande v. State of Maharashtra (12/2024) The Principal District Judge partly allowed the appeal, setting aside the trial court's rejection of the plaintiffs' application regarding a land dispute over road access. The court found the trial court erred by failing to consider evidence that plaintiffs provided an alternate 11-foot-wide road on their property (constructed under government scheme) to resolve village access issues. The matter was remanded to the trial court with directions for the Tahsildar to examine the alternate road proposal and provide detailed maps and facts before rehearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Bhagwan Ratnaji Kalbande v. State of Maharashtra (12/2024) The Principal District Judge partly allowed the appeal, setting aside the trial court's rejection of the plaintiffs' application regarding a land dispute over road access. The court found the trial court erred by failing to consider evidence that plaintiffs provided an alternate 11-foot-wide road on their property (constructed under government scheme) to resolve village access issues. The matter was remanded to the trial court with directions for the Tahsildar to examine the alternate road proposal and provide detailed maps and facts before rehearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts